Residents have been fighting since 2017 to preserve the wetland reserve.
By Peter Ghys
BASS Coast Shire Council this week refused an application by an Albert Ruttle Estate landowner to clear vegetation and build a house on a portion of the wetland reserve set aside as communal open space for residents of the estate.
It’s a second victory this year for Ruttle Estate residents who have been fighting since 2017 to preserve the wetland reserve.
The development of the wetlands featured in marketing of the estate and was a condition of the original planning agreement for the Albert Ruttle subdivision back in 1993.
BASS Coast Shire Council this week refused an application by an Albert Ruttle Estate landowner to clear vegetation and build a house on a portion of the wetland reserve set aside as communal open space for residents of the estate.
It’s a second victory this year for Ruttle Estate residents who have been fighting since 2017 to preserve the wetland reserve.
The development of the wetlands featured in marketing of the estate and was a condition of the original planning agreement for the Albert Ruttle subdivision back in 1993.
On the last day of February the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) ruled that an adjoining landowner of Lot 28 could not build on the reserve.
VCAT agreed with Bass Coast Shire Council and Residents and Friends of Ruttle Estate (RaFoRE) that any proposed use and development of the land for a dwelling would contravene the obligations detailed in a Section 173 Agreement.
The agreement sets out certain conditions on the landholder, including allowing and enabling access to the land and maintaining the area to protect and enhance any native vegetation and fauna.
In 2017, residents were shocked to find that the reserve was being advertised as two building blocks, Lot 28 and 29. A group of residents formed RaFoRE at that time, and have since then invested substantial resources trying to prevent development beyond its intended use as wetlands.
Last year an application to the council to remove the 173 agreement was withdrawn after Bass Coast planners found it violated the Overlay Development Plan (ODP).
The VCAT ruling holds significance for RaFoRE’s ongoing efforts to preserve the wetlands reserve, an important biodiversity site, popular with birdwatchers and walkers from the estate and the wider Inverloch community, and part of the Inverloch-Wonthaggi biolink.
In their judgment VCAT pointed out that the ODP must be complied with.
Peter Ghys is a resident of the estate and a member of Residents and Friends of Ruttle Estate.
VCAT agreed with Bass Coast Shire Council and Residents and Friends of Ruttle Estate (RaFoRE) that any proposed use and development of the land for a dwelling would contravene the obligations detailed in a Section 173 Agreement.
The agreement sets out certain conditions on the landholder, including allowing and enabling access to the land and maintaining the area to protect and enhance any native vegetation and fauna.
In 2017, residents were shocked to find that the reserve was being advertised as two building blocks, Lot 28 and 29. A group of residents formed RaFoRE at that time, and have since then invested substantial resources trying to prevent development beyond its intended use as wetlands.
Last year an application to the council to remove the 173 agreement was withdrawn after Bass Coast planners found it violated the Overlay Development Plan (ODP).
The VCAT ruling holds significance for RaFoRE’s ongoing efforts to preserve the wetlands reserve, an important biodiversity site, popular with birdwatchers and walkers from the estate and the wider Inverloch community, and part of the Inverloch-Wonthaggi biolink.
In their judgment VCAT pointed out that the ODP must be complied with.
Peter Ghys is a resident of the estate and a member of Residents and Friends of Ruttle Estate.